Study exposes myths related to water births

A new study has exposed some of the myths of water births. There is a general belief that the water can alleviate and shorten the pains of labor when undergoing natural births.

A new report conducted by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) Committee on Fetus and Newborn and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) has found that water births are dangerous for both the mother and newborn.

The research team studied the available information on water births. The researchers separated the effects of water birth during early stage labor and late stage labor.

It was found that women (who were in their early stage of labor) had a relaxed experience while sitting in a tub of water. This phase was also tied to fewer epidurals and other anesthesia use, as well as a shorter labor.

The researchers say, when the women went from early stage to the late stage of labor, the researchers discovered that giving birth while immersed in water did not reduce the number of perineal trauma or tears. Moreover, it had no effect on women’s likelihood of requiring assisted vaginal deliveries or Cesarean sections.

The more concerning thing is that water births were found to have an increased risk of infections. Researchers say, when a newborn is born underwater, the baby’s ability to regulate his/her body temperature becomes jeopardized. Moreover, if the umbilical cord breaks apart unexpectedly, it could lead to hemorrhaging and shock. In the rare situation, the baby could end up drowning.

The report was published in the Pediatrics.

Share this:

The benefits of a water birth far outweigh a few random increased risks. The needs to want this type of birth though, and many of today’s mothers are afraid of this natural process because fewer and fewer babies are born this way.

Susan

Ask any of them except for the few that don’t seem to matter to you that had a baby die because of the water birth.

Deconus

How is it natural? I’ve never seen a land dwelling mammal walk into a lake to give birth…

Et_Tu_Brutus

Baby is in water and the delivery into warm water has proven to be quite comfortable for the baby. Hospitals and doctors are proving to be dangerous to women giving birth based on current stats.

Deconus

How are they “proving” to be dangerous? There’s probably nearly 8 billion people on this rock by now. If your statement was remotely true, how the hell do we have so many people on this planet? With no slowing of birth rate in sight…

ccm

Have you ever seen them get induced/ drugged/cit up either? Oh no… but that’s okay lol

Marty Susman

“the world’s foremost midwife” Are you kidding me, you have zero idea of what you are talking about. The C section rates in the U.S. “for woman who receive prenatal care is very low. As for the C Section & the midwife, good luck keeping the baby & mother alive while trying to get the lady to the hospital…

Jane Doe

Sorry Marty you are dead wrong.

The US C-section rate, along with rates of maternal and infant mortality or morbidity is among the highest in the world, most are needless, and women/babies face very high rates of mortality and morbidity when using hospital birth services. Study after study as proven that midwife centered non-hospital care is SAFER for both mother and baby.

In fact this past fall The Joint Commission for Hospital Accredidation issued a scathingly negative review of hospital failure to adequately care for women in labor/childbirth. Because of this intense failure and unacceptably high levels of demonstrated harm for women and babies who utilize hospitals for birth services hospitals will now be required to meet/demonstrate improved care standards, lower c-section rates (shamefully upwards of 50%) or lose their ccreditation.

Here’s an excerpt from the report:

“Why did the Joint Commission decide it is important to
lower C-section rates?

In their rationale, the Joint Commission wrote, “The removal of any pressure to not perform a cesarean birth has led to a skyrocketing of hospital, state and national cesarean section rates… There are no data that higher rates improve any outcomes, yet C-section rates continue to rise. Some hospitals now have C-section rates over 50%.”

Why did the Joint Commission decide hospitals should lower the C-section rate in first-time moms?

The thing about first-time moms is that there are clear-cut quality improvement activities that can prevent preventable C-sections in these women. For example, a large number of preventable C-sections occur because more than 40% of all
first-time moms have their labor induced. When medications are used to force labor, a first-time mom doubles her chance of having an unplanned C-section.

Another common practice that contributes to high rates of preventable C-sections is admitting women to the hospital when they are still in very earlylabor. Finally, a substantial number of unplanned C-sections are due to physicians mislabeling a woman’s labor as “failure to progress”—a term that research says is more aptly named “failure to wait.”

Basically, it boils down to the fact that physician and hospital practice patterns—not pregnant women’s conditions or their diagnoses—are the major reason for differences in C-section rates among hospitals. According to the Joint Commission, it’s time for hospitals and care providers to look at their practice, and see what they can do to prevent preventable Cesareans.

Marty Susman

You have NO clue about what you are blabbing, Hospitals (all of them) try to keep C section rates down, they have talks with their doctor’s, they show stat’s Etc. You could not be more totally wrong if you threw darts at a board & then spewed out B.S. as you are doing….

fuzzybearslippers

Actually Marty, you are wrong. I would personally never have a midwife or a home birth (unless it happened unexpectedly), but even I know that studies have condemned the increasing C-Section rates in the US (I work in the medical research field and have read some of these studies), and that most of them are unnecessary. I personally had a natural childbirth in a hospital, with an OB-GYN, no epidural, and I am glad that I did. But even though some people are making comments slanted toward their personal biases against doctors and hospitals, that particular critique is dead on. There are too many cesareans in the US, and compared to other developed nations with lower infant and maternal mortality, statistically that number is unsupportable.

Marty Susman

NO, I AM NOT WRONG, I have no clue what hospital you are talking about BUT here in California are forever taking to the ob’s about doing less not more C. sections. I can also tell you a C section cost’s hospitals more money then natural births & doctors have to spend more time overall with them so your whole concept is just wrong.

MikeJones44

The problem is not the medical establishment pushing for c-sections and hospitalization. It is the patient demanding a c-section or epidural.

Jane Doe

Marty Marty Marty….look up what hospitals get reimbursed for c-sections vs natural births. The FACT is that hospitals LOSE money on birth centers. Are you saying that the Joint Commission is wrong and YOU are right? Dude: get over yourself and your misinformed opinions.

Deconus

I was born C-section. I and my mother are just fine 31 years later. And by the shear amount of people on this planet, your argument is invalid.

Jane Doe

Wow is that supposed to be ‘logic’?

Deconus

Yes, something you clearly don’t grasp. We’re still producing children at an unchecked rate regardless of c-section fatalities. There’s nothing to be concerned about, move along to another topic you can voice your alarmist opinions about. I’m sure you already have.

FinalOpinion

Derpy, you call this a …..natural process??? I don’t think so.

richardruhling

In the Bible, Exodus 1:16, they used stools that probably was like squatting for a bowel movement to facilitate the process. Herbs like slippery elm may help as a lubricant. The greed of MDs wanting higher price for C-sections is a shame (32% mentioned below, compared to 1.7% worldwide).

Sloan

The entirety of Exodus is a fabrication.

Marty Susman

Richard, you are so totally WRONG & spreading garbage like this could be the resin someone die’s…

Jane Doe

Marty you are VASTLY underinformed and have no idea what you are talking about

This study did not expose myths related to waterbirth. It exposed the glaring biases of medical groups that are not comfortable with waterbirths — groups that, BTW, stand to profit if fewer women birth in water at home or in birth centers with midwives.

Bonfe Roni

Unless I misread the article, this study showed that water births do NOT reduce the risks of perineal trauma or tears. It also showed that water births do increase the risk of infection.

I’m not sure what this says about myths or medical conspiracies, but data talks and bull**** walks.

VictoryCall

The first paragraph says, “A new study has exposed some of the myths of water births. There is a general belief that the water can alleviate and SHORTEN THE PAINS OF LABOR when undergoing natural births.”

The article goes on to say, “It was found that women (who were in their early stage of labor) had a relaxed experience while sitting in a tub of water. This phase was also tied to fewer epidurals and other anesthesia use, as well as a SHORTER LABOR.”

So the article addressed a “general belief” about water birth, and then *confirmed* it. That’s hardly “exposing a myth.”

The article didn’t mention a “general belief” that water birth leads to less perineal trauma or tears, or less infection. I’ve certainly never heard anyone suggest that water births reduce these events. So that’s hardly “exposing a myth.”

However, I *have* heard that the relaxing effect of laboring in water leads to fewer epidurals, and what does the data in the article show? Lo and behold! Fewer epidurals when early labor is in water.

Given the “general beliefs” and data presented in the article, “Study exposes myths related to water births” is certainly a very biased and misleading title.

Why not title the article “Study shows water births related to shorter labor and fewer epidurals”? … answer: Because there is an attempt to slant the article negatively towards water births, and favorably toward the position favored by the medical establishment – as difficult as the DATA from this study makes that.

Marty Susman

You have no idea what you are talking about…An go/gyn see’s the patient a dozen times & is lucky if the insurance company pays them $1,200.00 that also includes hours of labor etc.

Kristen

I think what’s escaping a lot of people is that your average hospital birth has risks, as well. Any birth has some risk. I think people are focusing in on this particular subject and saying, well maybe this isn’t entirely safe, maybe women should just do what the mainstream does and go to the hospital instead. I think you need to be smart about it.

Historically, hospital births are very, very recent. Doctors don’t always make the best decisions. I’ve seen plenty of news articles about babies dying or severely injured due to a doctor’s/hospitals incompetence. The outcome is NOT always perfect on either side, and it’s a shame that these articles are making water births look so bad. Is water birth perfectly safe? Again, no. No method is perfect. Each method has its own risks. Women should be informed about these risks.

I had two hospital births and then had my third at home in a pool. My hospital births were horrible experiences, and that’s what led me to have my last at home. BUT… I did my research, I prepared, I happened to live practically right next to a hospital (just in case!), and I chose experienced midwives with good reviews. If I didn’t live near a hospital I would’ve had a detailed plan in case something went wrong. I was healthy, my son was healthy, and I felt confident about my decision.

What happened? My labor was short, I only felt a second of pain through the entire thing, I felt amazing. My son was happy, healthy, alert, and an awesome nurser. I was walking around shortly after giving birth, and I felt well enough to do some shopping and run some errands the next day.

It’s been 2.5 years now, and I still am SO glad I made that choice. I would make it a million times over. I loved every second of it. Is it right for everyone? No. But I think that women need more access to ALL the risks to ALL the methods. No bias. My son did better than the other two kids who were born in hospitals. I did better. I wasn’t miserable for weeks and in pain. I’m just saying…

Sorry so long. It just bugs me that all these new articles that are suddenly appearing on this subject are so one-sided. Thanks for reading!

Marty Susman

People like Kristen are the same people that do not vaccinate their children therefor creating illness & death for other children…Hospitals & doctors have one very important thing going for them, doctors, nurses, neonatal unit’s & most important people that can help you if you have a problem…

JoelleM

That is an unfair allegation toward home birth or water birth advocates. I am married to a physician, and after much research, have had two planned water births, one in the hospital and one out of the hospital, both with excellent midwives with obstetrical backup plans in place. Furthermore I fully vaccinate my children and I have researched that, too.

Marty Susman

If you are a doctor & allowed your wife to have a home birth it’s because you were with them. Still a home birth can be very dangerous. If you are a doctor & you advocate home births with a midwife, you are NOT an ob/gyn & you have no idea of the dangers you are subjecting your wife to. Lastly these so called midwifes here in ca don’t even have to have a license or Mal Practice. Further more the so called medical doctor back up is NOT in the home or even any where near it. Sorry but if you are a doctor I would simply say shame on you…

Jane Doe

Marty do some research….you are fos sir. They cause more probs than they solve. Is a 50% failure rate acceptable?

Marty Susman

Jane Doe, you are talking in circles… NO ob/gyn or hospital wants to perform a C section because of the extra work involved. No ob/gyn demands epidural’s.. I can tell you flat out you haven idea what you are talking about…. Home delivery’s, mid wife delivery’s, water delivery’s are “all dangerous” not because of the delivery but because there is NO ONE THAT CAN DEAL WITH AN EMERGENCY IF IT COMES UP…THERE IS “NOT” AN OB/GYN standing by anywhere, that’s B.S. The midwife sit”s in the home, collects more money then an OB/GYN would get since the OB has an office, staff, rules, regulations, MAL PRACTICE that the lay midwife does not…OH, I forgot, HOW ABOUT AN EDUCATION IN MEDICINE AS WELL…… Sorry jane doe (afraid to use a real name) you are just totally wrong & based on your emails, this is a waste of time since like republican’s, you won;t deal in facts, only folk lore & web based B.S.

Jane Doe

Marty…..DO SOME RESEARCH. I am a medical professional these past 35 years. I can tell from your response that you did not even look at the link I posted. I have a medical degree and I know what I’m talking about. You sir do not.

Hospitals make serious $$$$ on c-sections. If they did not the numbers would not be skyrocketing you fool!

Stop talking now. You obviously have no education because everything you say is wrong anc clearly based on your ignorant assumptions.

ccm

The thing that is really misleading here is that this is NOT a study it is a report. The pediatric association and acog just released their opinions not statistics on any research. They admitted in their report that they have no idea how many babies are born via water birth in the USA, but despite this took a quote “handful” of NEAR drownings over the last DECADE as enough reason to effectively ban it from good practice. Well done docs, well done.

Jane Doe

In short this is propaganda/marketing by the AMA because they are losing customers…..it’s total BS

Tigerlily

Water birthing is so bizarre and unnatural. But it’s a great way to sell garbage like birthing baths and the process itself is crazy expensive. Another ploy. Whatever.

Guest

Was this article written by a fifth grader?

Jane Doe

This is NOT a study, it’s an advertisement based on lack of real data…..ob/gyns are loosing buisness fast because women are choosing midwives and birthcenters who provide bettew woman centered care and have demonstrated/evidence based better outcomes on birth, c-section, maternal and child health….

Donny Trammo

who cleans this mess up after the delivery? Pull the drain plug? Send in the pigs?

Deconus

This argument is pointless. If you want to drown your baby go ahead. But look at the numbers, there’s over 7 BILLION people on this planet, clearly we’re giving birth just fine either way.

Dianalyn Loveridge

I would really like to know how many of the persons on this panel were women who had a baby in hospital with out water birth then did it again with water birth how can they determine this info other wise? I have given birth both ways and can say from experience I have never had an infection and I tore with my first two one in water and one in hospital and did not tear with any others. The second was mostly from jumping 5 cm in the head from my firsts head size. I still needed less stitching on my second then my first. My water birth experiences were much more relaxing and comfortable then my hospital one it was also easier to move in water to adjust my position. All my births have been drug free vaginal deliveries 4 in water two out of water. I would not go back to out of water less there was a danger to me or baby that needed medical attention obviously that would be hard to do if I was staying in water. I personally dont feel this was a very good study.